What is Heresy?

[redleghunter]

From CARM.

Heresy is a false teaching. It is a belief or idea that is in contradiction to orthodoxy. In the context of Christianity, heresy is that which deviates from standard biblical teaching. Examples of heresy would be polytheism, a denial of the resurrection of Christ...


The word "heresy" comes from the Greek 'hairesis' which means "choosing" or "faction." At first, the term heresy did not carry the negative meaning it does now. But, as the early church grew in its scope and influence throughout the Mediterranean area, various teachers proposed controversial ideas about Christ, God, salvation, and other biblical themes. It became necessary for the church to determine what was and was not true according to the Bible. For example, Arius of Alexandar (A.D. 320 ) taught that Jesus was a creation. Was this true? Was this important? Other errors arose. The Docetists taught that Jesus wasn't human. The Modalists denied theTrinity. The Gnostics denied the incarnation of Christ. Out of necessity, the church was forced to deal with these heresies by proclaiming orthodoxy; and in so doing, condemnation upon these heresies and the heretics became a reality.

https://carm.org/what-is-heresy

 

[Received]

From CARM.

Heresy is a false teaching. It is a belief or idea that is in contradiction to orthodoxy. In the context of Christianity, heresy is that which deviates from standard biblical teaching. Examples of heresy would be polytheism, a denial of the resurrection of Christ...


The word "heresy" comes from the Greek 'hairesis' which means "choosing" or "faction." At first, the term heresy did not carry the negative meaning it does now. But, as the early church grew in its scope and influence throughout the Mediterranean area, various teachers proposed controversial ideas about Christ, God, salvation, and other biblical themes. It became necessary for the church to determine what was and was not true according to the Bible. For example, Arius of Alexandar (A.D. 320 ) taught that Jesus was a creation. Was this true? Was this important? Other errors arose. The Docetists taught that Jesus wasn't human. The Modalists denied theTrinity. The Gnostics denied the incarnation of Christ. Out of necessity, the church was forced to deal with these heresies by proclaiming orthodoxy; and in so doing, condemnation upon these heresies and the heretics became a reality.

https://carm.org/what-is-heresy

That's the nice rendition. Heresy is historically whatever we don't agree on that gives me an excuse to burn you at the stake.

 

[Hillsage]

From CARM.

Heresy is a false teaching. It is a belief or idea that is in contradiction to orthodoxy. In the context of Christianity, heresy is that which deviates from standard biblical teaching. Examples of heresy would be polytheism, a denial of the resurrection of Christ...


The word "heresy" comes from the Greek 'hairesis' which means "choosing" or "faction." At first, the term heresy did not carry the negative meaning it does now. But, as the early church grew in its scope and influence throughout the Mediterranean area, various teachers proposed controversial ideas about Christ, God, salvation, and other biblical themes. It became necessary for the church to determine what was and was not true according to the Bible. For example, Arius of Alexandar (A.D. 320 ) taught that Jesus was a creation. Was this true? Was this important? Other errors arose. The Docetists taught that Jesus wasn't human. The Modalists denied theTrinity. The Gnostics denied the incarnation of Christ. Out of necessity, the church was forced to deal with these heresies by proclaiming orthodoxy; and in so doing, condemnation upon these heresies and the heretics became a reality.

https://carm.org/what-is-heresy

The word is used in the NT numerous times. Usually covered up by orthodox translators when it deviates from their 'FALSE DOCTRINE' definition. The Greek word haresis is in the NT 9 times and only 4 times is it translated heresy. All the other times it is translated as sect in KJV. And with 'that' definition it applies to Sadducees, Pharisees, Nazarenes, Judaism, and lastly the church itself. Paul himself feels no compunction at being called one who practices heresy.

Acts 24:14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

So the definition of 'false teaching' is simply a perversion of its truest definition IMO. Paul also says there actually must be heresy in the church to manifest those who are approved.

1 Corinthians 11:19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.

Most carnal minded Christians think this must mean whoever wins in the doctrinal debate is right. I suspect "approved and manifest" is more in line with talking about those whose life reflects Christ and not one whose talk reflects complete 'carnal minded indoctrination'. I know many a 'smart' theologian who can intellectually defeat a dumb pew warmer, whose doctrine is correct.

 

[Ken Behrens]

Any teaching is imperfect, since it relies on human words. Not all people understand the same words the same way. Even words like "man" and "woman" mean slightly different things to different people depending on individual experience. We really need to accept that we are never going to agree completely with something someone else says, and go on about the business of building our part of the Kingdom. We cannot "fill the earth" if we are all standing in the same place.

 

[redleghunter]

That's the nice rendition. Heresy is historically whatever we don't agree on that gives me an excuse to burn you at the stake.

Good example. We were never given the authority to kill another over doctrine. In effect condemning people to death over their error is actually a heresy in the New Covenant.

Glad you brought that up.

 

[JackRT]

That's the nice rendition. Heresy is historically whatever we don't agree on that gives me an excuse to burn you at the stake.

Historically, that seems to be the case. Virtually every Christian alive today is a heretic to some other Christian alive today. I have given up trying to keep track of how many heresies that I am guilty of. The whole thing becomes much more complicated when orthodoxy is wrong.

 

[redleghunter]

deviates from their 'FALSE DOCTRINE'

Which false doctrine do you speak of?

 

[redleghunter]

Historically, that seems to be the case. Virtually every Christian alive today is a heretic to some other Christian alive today. I have given up trying to keep track of how many heresies that I am guilty of. The whole thing becomes much more complicated when orthodoxy is wrong.

The confessional is always open.

I've seen you opine on this matter before. You have made your disagreements quite clear. I thank you for your honesty.

Where do your beliefs and convictions stand with regards to the UC of Canada statement of Faith?

 

[JackRT]

Where do your beliefs and convictions stand with regards to the UC of Canada statement of Faith?

I have a lot of problems with it. I have also tried to change my affiliation on CF but to no avail.

 

[redleghunter]

I have a lot of problems with it. I have also tried to change my affiliation on CF but to no avail.

Understand.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Heresy, in the most meaningful sense, is any teaching that is contrary and at odds with the historic, and received teaching of the Christian Church. That historic and received teaching being easily seen and understood in the historic Creeds, and to a lesser (possibly) extent the ecumenical councils of the Church. Of course the issue becomes complicated by several factors:

1. Disagreement on the number of ecumenical councils (all of the historic Churches accept the first Councils of Nicea and Constantinople).

2. Disagreement on the formula of the Nicene Creed, specifically on the issue of the Filioque.

3. Further differences such as the West's use of the Apostles' and Athanasian Creeds; and also as a related issue to 1 the role of the Definition of Chalcedon which is accepted by Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Protestants (at least officially among mainstream Protestant denominations) but which is not accepted by the Assyrian Church (which does not recognize any of the Councils after Constantinople I) or the Oriental Orthodox (which do not recognize any of the Councils after Ephesus); however Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians have largely been able to reconcile our differences in modern times by understanding that the issues are not substantive but semantic.

These complications are arguably why it is fairly smart for CF to employ the Nicene Creed (with or without Filioque) as the litmus test of orthodoxy in its [orthodox] Christians Only boards. It covers as many bases as possible while still being inclusive enough for the majority of Christians in the world. Though it isn't exhaustive, as--for example--it doesn't touch precisely upon issues such as Nestorianism* or Monothelitism or Eutychianism all of which are repudiated heresies.

-CryptoLutheran

*With the understanding that neither Nestorius himself (as far as we can tell) or the Assyrian Church ever actually taught what we call Nestorianism, but nevertheless Nestorianism--the teaching that we can separate Christ's two natures to the point that they are nearly regarded as separate prosopa or "persons" is, explicitly heretical. Christ is not divided, Christ is God and man, without division or confusion.

 

[Hillsage]

Which false doctrine do you speak of?

Not doctrine..."doctrines". But hopefully, at least 'some' of the same ones JackRT alluded to in post #6. But didn't elaborate on either.

 

[redleghunter]

Not doctrine..."doctrines". But hopefully, at least 'some' of the same ones JackRT alluded to in post #6. But didn't elaborate on either.

Please elaborate.

 

[Hillsage]

Please elaborate.

I don't think we've even agreed upon a definition of heresy. If we can't even do that first, then we've kinda missed the OP question, haven't we?

I've presented scriptural support for my view and ViaCrusis has presented his view. Any takers on either?